Life events

Interest in examining life events has markedly increased during the last two decades. There are various views on the nature and effects of life events, but all of them emphasize the great importance of life events on the development of an individual. Life events may be examined as markers or as processes. As markers they are transition points which change and direct the course of an individual's life. At the same time they are processes which have their own context, history and course; they do not take place in a vacuum but interfere with other events (Danish & al. 1980, Danish & al. 1983).

Life events have some structural characteristics or properties which are common to all events (Danish & al. 1980). Some of the main properties are event timing, duration, sequencing, cohort specificity, contextual purity and probability of occurrence. In addition to these properties, life events can be classified either as individual or cultural. Cultural life events are societal and historical events that shape the environments where people live and grow up.

Individual life events, which are examined in Lhis sluu y, are points in the course of a person's life that specifically influence his or her development. They can be biological (e.g. menopause, severe illness) or social (e.g. retirement, grandparenthood, death of a close person).

According to Brim and Ryff (1980) life events are basically biological, social or physical. They may also be psychological, but Brim and Ryff prefer to view psychological changes as outcomes of the biological, social and physical events. They present a typology of life events which is based on three (of the many) properties of such events. These properties are social distribution (whether the event is experienced by many or few), age relatedness (strong or weak correlation with age) and likelihood of occurrence (high or low probability of occurrence). All these properties affect an individual's anticipation as to

whether he or she will experience the event and at what age. For example, retirement is an event experienced by many, has high probability of occurrence and is strongly correlated with age.

In earlier studies life events were not seen only as markers or turning points, but they were often regarded as crises, leading to physical or mental illness, if individuals are not able to solve them or adjust to them (e.g. Holmes

& Rahe 1967, Dohrenwend & Dohrenwend 1974). On the basis of this kind of crisis conception and empirical findings, Holmes and Rahe (1967) developed a scale to evaluate the effects of life events (the Social Readjustment Rating Scale).

This method has since been widely used and later methods - mostly questionnaires - have often, at least to some extent, been based on it, even if their developers have found fault with it (e.g. Sarason & al. 1985). It has been much criticized for its restricted conception of stress, ignorance of age effects, lack of differentiation between positive and negative events and limited psychometric properties (for a review, see e.g. Chiriboga & Cutler 1980). In Finland the method of Holmes and Rahe has been critically evaluated in the life change studies of Aro (1981; metal industry workers as subjects), Hurme (1981;

children) and Saari (1981; students).

Some researchers examine life events mainly from the viewpoint of their influence on the mental growth or changes in behaviour of an individual (Danish & al. 1983). Life events may also be classified according to their probability. They may be normative or non-normative, probable or unlikely in certain life stages of most individuals. It is difficult to foresee the beginning, duration and other factors of non-normative events, and they make more or different kinds of demands on adaptation than do normative events (Baltes &

Willis 1979). Brim and Ryff (1980) classify life events on the basis of their probability, but they write also about unnamed or hidden events which may vary with culture or community. These events faced by individuals are not generally known about or have been thought to be too sensitive in nature to be the object of study.

The stressfulness of life events depends on the meaning of the event to the individual. But there are also a number of common features affecting stress and well-being, such as whether the event is unexpected or expected (and anticipated), and whether the event is positive or negative. In most cases only negative events have been regarded as stressful, also by the subjects of life event studies (e.g. George & Siegler 1982). Stressfulness depends also on the

"social timetable" of the events. Life changes can take place on-time or off-time, too early or too late, that is, either as normally expected or unexpected. Early off-time changes (e.g. death of spouse in young adulthood to middle age) have more negative effects on psychological well-being and greater demands on adaptation than late off-time or on-time events (Cohler 1991; cf. Brim & Ryff 1980).

It is thought that age, gender and socioeconomic status are factors which affect not only adjustment to the stress caused by life events but also the amount of life events and the ways in which they are experienced (Whitbourne 1985). In particular, age is often thought to be in close relation to the amount and nature of experienced life events. The view that in old age there are fewer life events on the whole but more negative life events (and, consequently, more stress too; Chiriboga & Cutler 1980) than in younger adulthood, has recently

been highly criticized. Murrell et al. (1988) examined studies on life events among elderly people. They concluded that negative events and their influence on physical and mental well-being have been over-emphasized. Many events in late life are neither stressful nor dramatic, but normative (e.g. death of a close person, retirement, relocation, changes in health). Furthermore, they seem to be easier to cope with than the same events at a younger age. The effects of these old age normative events on physical and mental health or well-being may be smaller than the effects of the same events at a younger age. Murrell et al.

(1988) also drew a similar conclusion on the basis of their own prospective studies.

Lindholm and Tulla (1982) collected data on the frequency of various life events in three age groups (31 to 35, 51 to 55 and 71 to 75 years) of Finnish men. The events were most frequent in the youngest and least frequent in the oldest age group. Also their affectivity was strongest in the youngest group, but the proportion of negative events was highest in the oldest group. However, there were problems connected with the list of life events, because it included many (positive) events (e.g. in family and work) which, quite naturally, are more common in younger than older adulthood, and also negative events (especially in health) which always are more common in older age groups.

In a Danish study (Holstein & al. 1992), almost half of over 900 subjects aged over 70 and living in the community had experienced at least one of seven major stressful events mentioned in the questionnaire during the preceding 12 months. Over half of the subjects had not experienced any of the events during the year, one fourth had experienced one of the events, while one fifth had experienced more than one. The most common events were the death of a close person (22 %), one's own illness (18 %) and the illness of a close person (17 %).

Far fewer had experienced any of the other four events (accident, conflict with a close person, being a victim of crime and housing problems). These figures imply that negative events (losses and threats) are not necessarily very common in old age. On the other hand, they imply that events cumulate to some extent;

a significant minority of elderly people may experience many major stressful events in a relatively short period.

In an eight-year follow-up study of 45- to 70-year-old Americans the effects of five major life events (retirement, spouse's retirement, major medical event, widowhood, departure of last child from home) on physical and social­

psychological adaptation were much smaller than a crisis orientation would suggest (Palmore & al. 1979). On the other hand, if the same individuals (especially those with poor psychological and social resuun.:es) experienced many of these events within a short time, their effects were more serious.

There may be interactions between stressful life events and personality characteristics. Cohen (1979, 78) emhasized the importance of examining life events and personality in combination when trying to predict health outcomes.

She wrote that " ... personality characteristics could influence whether stressful life events are encountered or avoided and whether an appraisal of stress is made, and such traits could also affect the outcome of the person-environment transaction. On the other hand, stressful life experiences could influence the development of personality." Miller and Birnbaum (1988) also underline the importance of examining personal features, individual's dispositional coping

skills, together with the features of the event when analysing the impact of life events.

Life events can be construed as losses (or harms), threats or challenges (Lazarus & Launier 1978, Lazarus & Folkman 1984, McCrae 1984). Loss means damage that has already happened (e.g. death of a close persons), threat refers to the anticipation of damage (e.g. hospitalization). Challenges (e.g. new job) are usually regarded as more or less positive events. That is why they have not been studied in stress research as much as losses and threats. Whether a situation or event is regarded as a loss, threat or challenge depends on the appraisal of the person who faces it. A situation may also be regarded simultaneously as both a threat (or loss) and a challenge (or a start for growth), and losses may be seen as threatening to the future of an individual (Achte &

al. 1986, Sek 1991, Lieberman & Peskin 1992). But these categories may also be considered as objective attributes of stressful events (McCrae 1984), and it has been concluded that the concept of threat is generalizable over samples of younger and older adults (Davies & al. 1987). In any case, it is important to differentiate between types of events, because they influence the choice of coping strategies, and the categories make it easier to understand the diversity of events. For a somewhat different classification of stressful events (losses, attacks, restraints and threats), see e.g. Coleman (1990).

Life events may also be classified according to the domain of the event:

for example, whether it concerns self, family, health, work or economics (George

& Siegler 1982); or family, health, self-esteem or a loved one's well-being (Folkman & al. 1987). That is, what is at stake in the event. These kinds of classifications are closely related to the primary appraisal of the situation made by individuals discussed later in this review. In life event and coping studies the appraisal of the situation has often been made (retrospectively) by the researchers and not the subjects themselves.

Major life events are regarded as the main sources of stress in younger as well as in older adulthood. But there are also other, often overlooked sources of stress, perhaps the most important of which are chronic minor events or stressful situations and problems in the everyday lives of individuals, which are often called daily hassles (e.g. Lazarus & Folkman 1984, Edwards & Cooper 1988, Cohler 1991). On the basis of their studies on daily hassles and major life events of adults in different age phases, both Chamberlain and Zika (1990) and Landreville and Vezina (1992) conclude that daily hassles are even a better predictor of psychological well-being and mental health than major life events.

That is why minor events should be examined more closely also in stress and coping studies. However, daily hassles have often been studied as an important source of stress to be coped with because of the short time span in many coping questionnaires.

In their interview and questionnaire study of people over 65 years old, Russell and Cutrona (1991) assessed relations between social support, negative life events, daily hassles and depression during a 12-month period. Initial levels of social support and depressive symptomatology predicted the number of daily hassles but not the number of major life events. The incidence of daily hassles also depended on previous life events, and daily hassles mediated the effects of negative life events on subsequent depression. The results suggest that both major life events and daily hassles may have simultaneous effects on mood, and

both should thus be examined to gain a broad perspective on factors behind stress.

Besides major and minor life events, Edwards and Cooper (1988) name other factors which have been overlooked as potential sources of stress. Social information (information provided by others) may become a stressor, if it negatively influences an individual's perceptions of and responses to the environment. Also inner, personal sources of stress have usually been neglected.

These may arise from anticipation, imagination or a person's own behaviour.

Finally, even the ways of handling stress may become a source of a new stress:

difficulties in selecting effective coping strategies, depleting effects of coping, failure in coping, etc.

After reviewing the literature concerning life events and adjustment to them, Whitbourne (1985) presents a model on the relationships between life events and some mediating and moderating factors. A life event causes stress, because it means change and exhausts the individual's physical and mental resources. Stress is considered as the degree of readjustment demanded by the event. Coping strategies are formed out of the abilities, attitudes and knowledge that the person uses to adjust to the event and to reduce the stress caused by the event. Social skills also have their effects on the formulation of coping strategies. The final outcome of the process is either becoming physically or mentally ill (if one has not succeeded in reducing the stress) or in the opposite case, attaining balance. An individual's physical, mental and social resources influence his or her responses and adjustment to life events, especially through coping processes (cf. Fry 1989). These resources have been discovered (Palmore

& al. 1979) to have a strong impact on adaptation (or lack of them on non­

adaptation) to major life events, for example in the second study of the Duke Longitudinal Studies of Aging (see Palmore & al. 1985).